Karl Dubost wrote:
> 1. I would just keep alt attribute requirements to the functional
> requirements, such as if images are not loaded the content of the alt
> attribute must be displayed.
> 2. The specific requirements on accessibility such as the content of
> the alt attribute depending on the use cases should be entirely left to
> WCAG.
>
> The specification would then be lighter, could have a pointer saying all
> the requirements for accessibility are defined in wcag 2.0.
Sounds reasonable, and succinctly puts across what I've been trying to
articulate - that it's not the purpose of the HTML spec to define
accessibility requirements, but to provide the necessary
hooks/attributes/elements/constructs that, when used in accordance with
WCAG guidance, facilitate/allow the creation of accessible content.
P
--
Patrick H. Lauke
______________________________________________________________
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.com
______________________________________________________________
Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force
http://webstandards.org/
______________________________________________________________